# Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 

# Maintenance Plan

Prepared by:

Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

for the

District Department of the Environment Maryland Department of the Environment Virginia D epartment of Environmental Quality

on behalf of the Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee

May 22, 20 13Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan , May 22, 20 13



### Table of Contents

1. Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 1

2. Background

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 1

3. USEPA Maintenance Plan Requirements

................................ ................................ .............. 3

4. Attainment Inventory

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4

4.1 USEPA Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4

4.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

................................ ................................ ................ 5

5. Maintenance Demonstration

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 6

5.1 USEPA Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 6

5.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

................................ ................................ ................ 6

5.2.1 Mobile Source Emissions Budgets

................................ ................................ ........... 8

5.2.2 Control Measures for Maintenance of Good Air Quality

................................ ....... 13

6. Air Quality Monitoring Network

................................ ................................ ......................... 18

6.1 USEPA Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 18

6.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

................................ ................................ .............. 18

7. Verify Continued Attainment

................................ ................................ .............................. 20

7.1 USEPA Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 20

7.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

................................ ................................ .............. 20

8. Contingency Measures

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 21

8.1 USEPA Requirements

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 21

8.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

................................ ................................ .............. 21

8.2.1 Exceedance of the Attainment Year Emissions Inventory

................................ ..... 21

8.2.2 Near Term Contingency Measures for Air Quality Exceedances

........................... 22

8.2.3 Long Term Contingency Measures

................................ ................................ ......... 22

8.2.4 Contingency Measure Implementation Schedule

................................ ................... 23



### List of Figures
Figure 2

- 1: Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment Area

........................ 2
Figure 5

- 1: Washington DC

- MD

- VA 24 Hour PM 2.5 Trends

................................ ...................... 10
Figure 5

- 2: Washington DC

- MD

- VA Annual PM 2.5 Trend Chart

................................ ............... 10
Figure 5

- 3: Large EGUs in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA Area

................................ .................. 14
Figure 6

- 1: Washington DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 Monitoring Sites

................................ .................... 19Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan , May 22, 20 13



### List of Tables

Table 2

- 1: Washington DC

- MD

- VA Nonattainment Area Jurisdiction Listing with FIPS Codes

. 1

Table 4

- 1: 2007 Attainment Year Inven tory

................................ ................................ .................. 5

Table 5

- 1: Growth Assumptions Used in Emission Inventory Projections

................................ ... 6

Table 5

- 2: Washington DC

- MD

- VA SO 2 , NO X , and Primary PM 2.5 Emissions from 2007 to

2025

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 7

Table 5

- 3: Comparison of SO 2 Emissions from On

- Road Sources to the Total SO 2 Inventory

.... 9

Table 5

- 4 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA Maintenance Plan Tier 1 On

- Road Mobile Source Emissions Budgets ...........................................................................................11

Table 5

- 5: Washington DC

- MD

- VA Maintenance Plan Tier 2 On

- Road Mobile Source Emissions Budgets

..................... ......................................................................11

Table 8

- 1: Contingency Control Measures

................................ ................................ .................. 22



### List of Appendices
Appendix A 1 : List of MARAMA t echnical s upport d ocuments for the development of point

(EGU & Non

- EGU) , area, and nonroad mobile ( e xcept NMIM e missions for 2025) emissio ns inventories for 2007, 2017, and 2025 (Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area) ( TSDs & appendices a vailable on a CD on request) Appendix A2: 2007/17/25 Point (EGU & NEGU), Area, Nonroad (NMIM & MAR) Emissions

Summary by SCC & Onroad Emissions Summary by Vehicle Type (Available on a CD on request) Appendix B 1 : Technical support document for the development of nonroad mobile (except

marine, airport, and railroad) emissions inventories for 2025 (Washington, DC

MD

- VA PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area) Appendix B2: 2025 Nonroad Mobile ( NMIM ) Input / Output Files (Available on a CD on

request) Appendix C 1 : Technical s upport d ocument for the development of onroad mobile emissions

inventories for 2002, 2007, 2017, and 2025 (Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2 .5 Nonattainment Area) Appendix C2: 2002/07/17/25 MOVES Input / Output Files (Available on a CD on request) Appendix D: Washington DC

- MD

- VA State Compromise Overview: PM 2.5 Maintenance Plan

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Appendix E: Notices and Public Comments and ResponsesWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 1

1. Introduction

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland , and the Commonwealth of V irginia are submitting this maintenance plan for the Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 fine particulate ( PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) nonattainment area to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in support of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA redesignation request for that standard. This document demonstrates that PM 2.5 air quality in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area will remain compliant with the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, as measured by a monitoring network that meets all federal requ irements. Th is plan includes mobile vehicle emissions budgets for the interim year of 2017 and the out year of 2025 . It also contains contingency measures that will be implemented in the unlikely event that the area experience s an exceedance of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

2. Background

In July 1997, USEPA established two new PM 2.5 standards: an annual standard of 15.0 μg/m 3 and a 24

- hour standard of 65 μg/m 3 . USEPA designated the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area as nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS with an effecti ve date of April 5, 200 5 ( 70 FR 944 , 1/5/2005 )

. Table 2

- 1 provides the jurisdictions within the Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 nonattainment area , and Figure 2

- 1 depicts the map of the area.

Since these designations were made, PM 2.5 air quality in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area has improved such that the air quality is significantly better than required by the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The Washington DC

- MD

- VA region’s federal reference monitors have demonstrated compliance with the 65 μg/m 3 daily standard since the inception of the PM 2.5 monitoring programs within each state. The federal reference monitors have demonstrated compliance with the 15.0 μg/m 3 annual standard since 2005. The most recent design value for the 24

- hour standard, based on 200 9

- 201 1 data, is 2 6 μg/m 3 , and the most recent design value for the annual standard, based on 200 9

- 201 1 data, is 1 0.8 μg/m 3

.

Table 2

- 1 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA Nonattainment Area Jurisdiction Listing with FIPS Codes

Maryland Jurisdictions Virginia Jurisdictions Charles County (24

- 017 ) Fairfax County (51

- 059) Frederick County (24

- 021) Prince William County (51

- 153) Montgomery County (24

- 031) Arlington County (51

- 013) Prince Georges County (24

- 033) Loudon County (51

- 107) City of Fairfax (51

- 600) City of Falls Church (51

- 610) City of Manassas (51

- 683) City of Manassas Park (51

- 685) Washington D.C. (11

- 001) City of Alexandria (51

- 510)Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 2 Figure 2

- 1 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment AreaWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 3

These improvements in air quality are due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions of sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NO X ), the precursors to PM 2.5 , and also in reductions of primary PM 2.5 emissions. This document provides a maintenance plan, as required under § 175A o f the federal Clean Air A ct (CAA) , to ensure that the citizens of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area enjoy the benefits of healthy air quality that complies with the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS for a minimum of 10 years, through 2025. This maintenance plan supports the redesignation request that the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia have submi tted to USEPA concurrently with this document.

3. US EPA Maintenance Plan Requirements

The redesignation process provides that a state may petition US EPA to redesigna te a nonattainment area as attainment and that US EPA may approve the redesignation subject to certain criteria being met. Section 107(d)(3)(E) stipulates one of these criteria, that US EPA must fully approve a maintenance plan that meets the requirements of § 175A. A state may submit both the redesignation request and the maintenance plan at the same time, and rulemaking on both may proceed on a parallel track. All applicable nonattain ment area requirements must remain in place. The maintenance plan constitutes a SIP revision and must provide for maintenance of the relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after redesignation, including additional measures to ensure prompt corre ction of any violation of the NAAQS. The state must also submit a SIP revision 8 years after the original redesignation request is approved to provide for maintenance of the NAAQS for an additional 10 years following the first 10

- year period. USEPA provi ded guidance dated September 4, 1992 on the redesignation request and maintenance plan process in the memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division to Regional Air Directions entitled Procedures for Processing Request s to Redesig nate Areas to Attainment (redesignation guidance). Other requirements are provided in 40 CFR 51 Subpart Z, entitled Provisions for Implementation of PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (implementation rule). Additional guidance was received in t he development of this maintenance plan from USEPA regional staff.

US EPA requires the following provisions to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS:

 S tate s must develop an attainment emissions inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area that is su fficient to attain the NAAQS.

 S tate s may generally demonstrate maintenance by showing that future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory over the 10

- year period following redesignation.

 Once an ar ea has been redesignated, state s must continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network in order to verify the area's attainment status.

 S tate s must ensure that each has the legal authority to implement and enforce all measures necessary t o attain and maintain the NAAQS. States must verify c ontinued attainment by indicating how maintenance plan progress will be tracked.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 4

 Contingency measures must be available to promptly correct any NAAQS violation.

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia have developed a maintenance plan that meets all USEPA requirements and demonstrates that because of permanent and enforceable measures, emissions over the 10 years following redesignation approval will remain below the 2007 attainment year levels while allowing for growth in population and vehicle miles traveled. The period covered by this maintenance plan is 2007 through 2025. Further, the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia commit to submitting a second 10

- year maintenance plan, if still required for this standard.

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia ha v e developed an emissions inventor y in accordance with USEPA guidance that identifies the level of emissions sufficient to achieve the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. This attainment inventory consists of the actual emissions for a year during the three

- year period associated with the monitoring data s howing attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, that is, 2007. The plan includes a demonstration that emissions will remain beneath the 200 7 levels for a 10

- year period by keeping in place key elements of the current federal and state regulatory programs and p utting in place additional controls.

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia will continue to operate and maintain its air quality monitoring network. The jurisdictions have the legal authority to implement and enforce specified measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS.

In addition to maintaining key elements of regulatory program s , the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia will acquire air quality and source

e missions data to track attainment and maintenance. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures, as necessary, to promptly correct any NAAQS violation that occurs after redesignation of the area.

The following sections provide detail on each of t he above requirements, and the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area’s approach to meeting each requirement.

4. Attainment Inventory

4.1 USEPA Requirements

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia must develop an attainment year emissi ons inventory to identify the level of emissions sufficient to achieve the NAAQS. This inventory should be consistent with USEPA's most recent guidance on emission inventories for nonattainment areas available at the time . It s hould also include emission s during the time period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS . Where a state has made an adequate demonstration that air quality has improved as a result of the SIP, the attainment inventory will generally be the actual inventory during the time period the area attained the standard. The inventory must be based on annual emissions of SO 2 , NO X , and primary PM 2.5 in units of tons per year (tpy) during the attainmentWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 5

year. Volatile organic compounds ( VOC ) and ammonia ( NH 3 ) must also be included if they are determined to be significant contributors to PM 2.5 air quality issues

.

4.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia have developed an attainment year emissions inventory that identifies the level of emissions sufficient to achieve the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The attainment inventory consists of the actual emissions for the year during the three

- year period associated with the monitoring data showing attainm ent of the ozone standard, that is, 2007. The 2007 inventory is appropriate to use because it represents the typical inventory for the three

- year period demonstrating attainment of the standard. The 2007 inventory is consistent with USEPA guidance; is ba sed on annual emissions of SO 2 , NO X , and primary PM 2.5 during 2007; and contains a list of sources and emissions in tpy. VOC and NH 3 were determined to be insignificant for the PM 2.5 NAAQS for the Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 nonattainment area

, and for this reason they are not included in the attainment inventory. This determination was based on US EPA ’ s policy regarding VOC and NH 3 as they relate to fine particle formation in the atmosphere as noted in the i mplementation

r ule ( 72 FR 2059 1 , 4/25/ 20 07 )

. A detailed description of the procedures used to develop the attainment year inventory is contained in the Appendix A1, Appendix B1, and Appendix C1

.

Table 4

- 1 : 2007 Attainment Year Inventory

Pollutant Point Area NonRoad Onroad Total

District of Columbia, Emissions in tpy

SO 2 612 1,241 234 68 2,156

NO X 789 1,547 3,300 7,512 13,148

PM 2.5 53 1,120 246 272 1,691

Maryland, Emissions in tpy

SO 2 176,880 1,078 550 319 178,827

NO X 30,365 3,222 10,406 47,279 91,272

PM 2.5 5,048 4,385 899 1,757 12,088

Virginia, Emissions in tpy

SO 2 5,956 3,414 867 220 10,457

NO X 6,701 4,166 13,111 36,848 60,826

PM 2.5 446 4,022 1,053 1,422 6,944

Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 Nonattainment Area ,

Emissions in tpy

SO 2 183,449 5,733 1,652 607 191,441

NO X 37,855 8,936 26,817 91,639 165,247

PM 2.5 5,547 9,528 2,198 3,452 20,724Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 6

5. Maintenance Demonstration

5.1 USEPA Requirements

S tate s may demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by showing that future emissi ons of a pollutant or its precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory. The demonstration should be for a period of 10 years following the redesignation. The projected inventory should consider future growth, including population and industry . It should also be consistent with the attainment inventory, and it should document data inputs and assumptions. All elements of the demonstration should be consistent with current US EPA guidance. Enforceability through regulations must also be demonstrated.

Any assumptions concerning emission rates must reflect permanent, enforceable

measures. S tate s generally cannot take credit for reductions unless there are regulations in place requiring those reductions or the reductions are otherwise sho wn to be perm anent. Therefore,

s tate s are expected to maintain the implemented control strategy despite redesignation to attainment unless such measures are shown to be unnecessary for maintenance or are replaced with measures that achieve equivalent redu ctions. Emission reductions from source shutdowns can be considered permanent and enforceable to the extent that those shutdowns have been reflected in the SIP and all applicable permits have been modified accordingly.

5.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

The 2017 and 2025 emissions were developed by projecting the 2007 emissions using the best available growth rates and project ion s, as noted in Table 5

- 1

. Table 5

- 2 d emonstrates how future projected emissions of SO 2 , NO X , and primary PM 2.5 will not exceed the l evels of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA attainment inventory for a minimum of 10 years following redesignation.

Table 5

- 1 : Growth Assumptions U sed in Emiss i on Inventory Projections

Category Level of Detail Source
Stationary/Industrial Source

Growth Source/Unit/Process Specific AEO State/Federal Requirements Area and Non

- Road Mo b ile Source

Growth Category Specific Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Cooperative Forecasts, AEO, USEPA estimates, etc.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Growth Jurisdiction

- specific Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Transportation Planning BoardWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 7 Table 5

- 2 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA SO 2

, NO X , and Primary PM 2.5 Emissions from 2007 to 2025

SO 2 Emissions in tpy

Year Point Area Non

Road Onroad Total (tpy)

2007 183,449 5,733 1,652 607 191,441 2017 28,183 4,139 433 560 33,315
     

     

- 155,265

- 1,594

- 1,218

- 47

- 158,125 2025 28,377 3,862 517 531 33,287
     

     

- 155,071

- 1,871

- 1,134

- 76

- 158,153
NO X Emissions in tpy

Year Point Area Non

Road Onroad 1 Total (tpy)

2007 37,855 8,936 26,817 91,639 165,247

2017 22,481 9,009 17,600 41,709 (Tier 1:41,709; Tier 2: 50,051) 90,799
     

     

- 15,374 73

- 9,217

- 49,930

- 74,448

2025 23,044 9,342 14,719 27,400 (Tier 1: 27,400; Tier 2: 32,880) 74,504
     

     

- 14,811 406

- 12,098

- 64,239

- 90,743 Primary PM 2.5 in tpy

Year Point Area Non

Road Onroad 1 Total (tpy)

2007 5,547 9,528 2,198 3,452 20,724

2017 5,656 9,632 1,579 1,787 (Tier 1: 1787; Tier 2: 2,144) 18,654
     

      109 104

- 619

- 1,665

- 2,070

2025 5,693 9,725 1,269 1,322 (Tier 1: 1,350; Tier 2: 1,586) 18,010
     

      146 198

- 928

- 2,129

- 2,714

1 Transportation buffers were added to the onroad mobile emissions for NO X and PM 2.5 for 2017 and 2025 to develop 2

- tie r (Tier 1 and Tier 2) mobile budgets for the two years. These mobile budgets are shown in brackets. See Section 5.2.1 for detail s of the development of mobile budgets

.

Mobile source emissions were calculated using USEPA’s MOVES2010a mobile source inventory model. These estimates are based on vehicle

- specific registration data obtained from each jurisdiction. Mobile source emissi on projections included the National Low Emission Vehicle Program ( 40 CFR 86 S ubpart R ); the 1994 Tier 1 Rule ( 40 CFR 86 S ubpart A ) ; the 2004 Tier 2 and Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule ( 40 CFR Part 80 S ubpart H, 40 CFR Part 85, and 40 CFR Part 86 ) ; and the 2004 and 2007 Heavy

- Duty Diesel Vehicle Rules (40 CFR Part 86 S ubpart P )

. All jurisdictions were modeled with Phase II Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) and an enhanced I/M program for all analysis years. More information on the development of these inventories may be found in the Technical Support Document (Appendix C1).

E missions for non

- road vehicles and equipment except for marine, rail, and locomotives were calculated using NMIM2008 (version NMIM20090504), which used NONROAD2008a model ( version July 2009 )

. This version of NONROAD2008a is USEPA’s most recently approved emissions estimation tool for the above mentioned nonroad sources

. Area, marine, rail, and locomotive emissions were calculated using the most updated practices and inputs. MoreWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 8

information on the development of these inventories may be found in the Appendix A1 and Appendix B 1

.

5.2.1 Mobile Source Emissions Budgets

Transportation conformity is a way to ensure that federal funding and approval are given to those transportation activities that are cons istent with air quality goals. T ransportation activities should not worsen air quality or interfere with an area’s continued compliance in regards to the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The federal transportation c onformity rule is codified in 40 CFR Part 93, subpart A , entitled Determining Conformity of Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans (transportation conformity rule) . This rule appl ies to areas designated as

nona ttainment for one or more NAAQS or that have been redesignated to attainment with federally approved air quality maintenance plans.

The responsible transportation planning entity for the Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 nonattainment area is the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) Transportation Planning Board (TPB)

. In the transpor t ation conformity process, over a ll emissions estimates by analysis year that take into account future traffic activity and projects expected to be completed are compared to a base year, a no build scenario, or emission budgets. Emission budgets are used in this dete rmination only if USEPA has appr o ved or found adequate emissions budgets that have been submitted as a SIP revision. For PM 2.5 , the pollutant itself and potentially all i t s various precursors would require analysis. NH 3 and V OC are precursors, h owe ver, they are not considered significant overall contributors to PM 2.5 air quality issues, as noted in the implementation rule at 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(3) . For other po l lutants and precurso r s, the highway contribution to those emissions may be insignificant. In that case, the transportation conformity rule allows such pollutants and precurso r s to be exempt from conformity analysis under certain circumstances:

40 CFR 93.109 (k) Areas with in significant motor vehicle emissions. Notwithstanding the other paragraphs in this section, an area is not required to satisfy a regional emissions analysis for §93.118 and/or §93.119 for a given pollutant/precursor and NAAQS, if EPA finds through the adequ acy or approval process that a SIP demonstrates that regional motor vehicle emissions are an insignificant contributor to the air quality problem for that pollutant/precursor and NAAQS. The SIP would have to demonstrate that it would be unreasonable to exp ect that such an area would experience enough motor vehicle emissions growth in that pollutant/precursor for a NAAQS violation to occur. Such a finding would be based on a number of factors, including the percentage of motor vehicle emissions in the contex t of the total SIP inventory, the current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for that NAAQS, the absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures, and historical trends and future projections of the growth of motor vehicle emissions. . .Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 9

T he District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia are herein making a finding that regional highway emissions of SO 2 are insignificant contributors to the PM 2.5 air quality of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area. The finding will become final if USEPA concurs and approves this maintenance plan

. This finding is due to the fact that the regional highway SO 2 emissions inventory constitutes a very small fraction of the overall emissions inventory in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area as shown in Table 5

- 3

.

Table 5

- 3 : Comparison of SO 2 Emissions from On

- Road Sources to the Total SO 2 Inventory

Year Metro DC Total SO 2

Emissions, tpy On

- Road SO 2

Emissions, tpy Percent On

- Road SO 2
2007 191,441 607 0.3

2017 33,315 560 1.7

2025 33,287 531 1.6

Additionally, PM 2.5 air quality in the region is good and getting better. Figure 5

- 1 and Figure 5

- 2 provide the regional trends in PM 2.5 air quality for the federal reference method monitoring sites. The design value for the Washington DC

- MD

- VA region is 1 0.8 μg/m 3 for years 200 9

- 201 1

, 4.2 μg/m 3 beneath the standard. As noted in Table 5

- 3 , the contribution of on

road mobile SO 2 emissions is expected to decline in both the 2017 and 2025, as compared to 2007. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that any increase in growth assumptions or activity data, beyond those already included in the on

- road SO 2 emissions estimation methodology, could account for an exceedance or violation of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS annual standard. For these same reasons, the likelihood of on

- road emissions of SO 2 contributing to an exceedance of the 1997 PM 2.5 24

- hour standard is even smaller.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 10 Figure 5

- 1 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA 24 Hour PM 2.5 Trends

Figure 5

- 2 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA Annual PM 2.5 Trend ChartWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 11

As required by the transportation conformity rule, this maintenance plan establishes on

road mobile source emissions budgets for NO X and PM 2.5 . These budgets represent the level of mobile source emissions that can be emitted in the area while supporting the air quality plan. The mobile source budgets established by this plan are presented in Table 5

- 4 and Table 5

- 5.

Table 5

- 4: Washington DC

- MD

- VA Maintenance Plan Tier 1 On

- Road Mobile Source Emissions Budgets

Year NO X On

- Road Emissions (tpy) PM 2.5 On

- Road Emissions (tpy)

2007 Attainment Year 91,639 3,452

2017 Interim Budget 41,709 1,787

2025 Predicted Emissions 27,400 1,322
Transportation Buffer

--- 28

2025 Final Budget 27,400 1,350

Table 5

- 5: Washington DC

- MD

- VA Maintenance Plan Tier 2 On

- Road Mobile Source Emissions Budgets

Year NO X On

- Road Emissions (tpy) PM 2.5 On

- Road Emissions (tpy)

2007 Attainment Year 91,639 3,452

2017 Predicted Emissions 41,709 1,787
Transportation Buffer 8,342 357

2017 Interim Budget 50,051 2,144

2025 Predicted Emissions 27,400 1,322
Transportation Buffer 5,480 264

2025 Final Budget 32,880 1,586

This maintenance plan provides a two

- tiered approach for the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) . This approach will be applied in future conformity analyses supporting the 1997 annual PM 2.5 standard and uses transportation buffers 1 to accommodate future transportation conformity determinations.

The initial Tier 1 MVEBs for PM 2.5 and the precursor NO X established for 2017 (interim year) and 2025 (out year) are based on mobile emissions inventory projections for 2017 and 2025. One exception is the PM 2.5 budget for 2025 which adds a transportation buffer of 28 tons per year (tpy) of PM 2.5 emissions to the budget to accommodate current inventory projections for 2040. The Tier 1 MVEBs wil l be in effect once the maintenance plan budgets are determined to be adequate.

1 Section 93.124(a) of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) allows for the use of conformity buffers (or safety margins) in setting motor vehicle emissions budgets.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 12

The Tier 2 MVEBs have been developed by adding a 20 percent transportation buffer to the mobile emissions inventory projections for PM 2.5 and NO X in 2017 and 2025. The buffer s will add 357 tpy of PM 2.5 and 8,342 tpy of NO X to the 2017 emission inventories, and 264 tpy of PM 2.5 and 5,480 tpy of NO X to the 2025 emission inventories to develop the Tier 2 MVEBs. The overall emissions inventories even with these buffers remain below the maintenance year caps for both pollutants. In the near term, mobile source emissions are rapidly decreasing due to th e implementation of the NLEV, and HDDV rules, even as Vehicle Miles Traveled ( VMT ) continues to grow. Once these rules have sufficiently penetrated the fleet, growth in VMT begins to push mobile emissions back on an upward trend. The transportation buffe rs are provided to accommodate technical uncertainties primarily due to model changes and to vehicle fleet turnover that may affect future motor vehicle emissions inventories. Tier 2 MVEBs become effective if it is determined that one or more of these unce rtainties lead to motor vehicle emissions estimates above the Tier 1 MVEBs. This determination will be made through the interagency consultation process and will be fully documented in the first conformity analysis that utilizes the Tier 2 budgets. Regula tions related to the interagency consultation process adopted by the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Virginia , and the Transportation Planning Board are identified below

. 2

District of Columbia: Title 20 Environment, Chapte r 20

- 15 G eneral and T ransportation Conformity, Rule Numbers 20

- 1503, 20

- 1504, 20

- 1505, 20

- 1506, 20

- 1507 Maryland: Title 26 Department of Environment, Subtitle 11 Air Quality, Chapter 26 Conformity, Regulation Numbers 26.11.26.04, 26.11.26.05, 26.11.26.06, 26.11.26.07, 26.11.26.08 Virginia: 9VAC5 Chapter 151 Regulation for Transportation Conformity Section 70 Consultation (9VAC5

- 151

- 70) Transportation Planning Board: Report titled “ Transportation Planning Board Consultation Procedures with respect to Transpo rtation Conformity Regulations Governing TPB Plans and Programs ”

, May 20, 1998

Table 5

- 4 provides details of the Tier 1 MVEBs for PM 2.5 and NO X for 2007, 2017, and 2025. Table 5

- 5 provides details of the Tier 2 MVEBs for PM 2.5 and NOx for 2007, 2017, and 2025. The transportation buffers listed in the se two tables use emission reductions achieved but not needed to maintain compliance with the standard after the attainment year.

Calculated as a percentage of total emissions, th e transportation buffer for the 2017 Tier 2 PM 2.5 MVEB is 1.9% of the total PM 2.5 inventory and for the 2017 Tier 2 NOx MVEB is 9.2% of the total NOx inventory. For 2025, the transportation buffer for the Tier 2 PM 2.5 MVEB is 1.5% of the total PM 2.5 inven tory and for NOx is 7.4% of the total NOx inventory.

The Washington DC

- MD

- VA area commits to evaluating and submitting, as a revision to the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, updated annual 2017 and 2025 MVEBs for NOx and PM 2.5 by the end of 2015. 3

2 District of Columbia: http://www.dcregs.dc.gov/Gateway/ChapterHome.aspx?ChapterNumber=20

- 15 Maryland: http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/SubtitleSearch.aspx?search=26.11.26 Virginia: http://leg1.state.va.us/000/reg/TOC09005.HTM#C0151 (9VAC5

- 151

- 70) Transportation Planning Board: http://www.mwcog.org/s tore/item.asp?PUBLICATION_ID=233
3 This is being pursued as part of an agreement between the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia . See Appendix D for details of the agreement.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 13

5.2.2 Control Measures for Maintenance of Good Air Quality

Point, non

- road

, and on

- road emission projections for 2017 and 2025 include a variety of control strategies that will reduce emissions of PM 2.5 , NO X , and SO 2 in the future years. The sections below desc ribe the major control programs in each category. Many of these programs are federal programs that are enforced on a regional or national level. In cases where the programs are delegated programs or state program s , the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia commit to the continuation of each program, to include compliance and enforcement mechanisms as appropriate to ensure that reductions assumed in 2017 and 2025 will be achieved.

5.2.2.1 Point Sector Controls

Point source emissions of PM 2.5 , SO 2 , and NO X are dominated in the Washington DC

MD

- VA region by the emissions from electrical generating units (EGU). The EGUs located in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA nonattainment area are the Possum Point Power Station in Fairfax, Virgin ia (ORIS 4 3804); the Potomac River Power Station in Alexandria, Virginia (ORIS 3788); the Chalk Point Generating Plant, in Prince George's County, Maryland (ORIS 1571); the Dickerson Generating Plant, in Montgomery County, Maryland (ORIS 1572); the Morgan town Generating Plant, in Charles County, Maryland (ORIS 1573); and the Benning Road Generating Station in the District of Columbia (ORIS 603 ). These facilities are subject to a variety of federal and state

- enforceable mechanisms that have reduced emissio ns at these units since 2007 and will continue to reduce emissions into the future. The emission reduction measures applicable to the point sources are described in the following sections.

5.2.2.1.1 Maryland Healthy Air Act

The Maryland Health Air Act (HAA) regulations became effective on July 16, 2007 (approved into the State of Maryland SIP on 9/4/2008

, 73 FR 51599 ) and required reductions in NO X , SO 2 , and mercury emissions from large coal burning power plants in Maryland. Specifically, this program limits emissions from the Chalk Point Generating Plant, the Dickerson Generating Plant, and the Morgantown Generating Plant, all of which are coal fired p ower plants located within the Maryland portion of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA nonattainment area. Emission reductions from the HAA are phased. The first phase required reductions in the 2009/2010 timeframe . C ompared against a 2002 emissions baseline, the f irst phase of the HAA reduced NO X emissions by almost 70 percent and SO 2 emissions by 80 percent . The second phase of emission controls will occur in the 2012/2013 time frame. At full implementation, the HAA will reduce NO X emissions by approximately 75 percent from 2002 levels and SO 2 emissions by approximately 85 percent from 2002 levels. The first phase of the HAA was successfully implemented, and the second phase of the program is expected to be implemented in a timely manner.

4 EGUs are assigned a 4

- digit ORIS (O ffice of the Regulatory Information System) identifier by t he Energy Information Agency (EIA) of the US Department of Energy

.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 14 Figure 5

- 3 : Large EGUs in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA Area

5.2.2.1.2 District of Columbia Source Shutdown

As a condition of the operating permit for the Benning Road Generating Station, Pepco Energy Services, Inc., agreed to permanently cease operation of the facility’s two electric generating units by December 17, 2012. The permit condition became federally enforceable as part of a SIP revision that was approve d by USEPA on February 2, 2012 (77 FR 22: 5191). Closure of the two large, uncontrolled oil

- fired turbines will result in SO 2 and NOx reductions.

5.2.2.1.3 Virginia Permitting Requirements.

A federal settlement reduced emissions of NO X and SO 2 significantly at t he Possum Point Power Station, which is located in Fairfax County, Virginia. This consent decree, “United States v. Virginia Electric and Power Co.,” (No. 03

- CV

- 517A, entered October 10, 2003), was signed April 17, 2003. The decree required the Possum Po int Power Station to switch two coal

- fired boilers to natural gas, thereby removing coal as a fuel at the facility. This requirement was also codified in a federally enforceable permit issued by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on October 5, 2001. This permit was issued under Article 8 and Article 9 of 9VAC5 Chapter 80 (Permits for Stationary Sources). Article 8 was most recently approved into Virginia’s SIP on October 22, 2008 (73 FR 62897) and on September 2, 2011 (76 FR 54706). Articl e 9 was most recently approved into Virginia’s SIP on October 22, 2008 (73 FR 62893).Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 15

The fuel switch from coal to natural gas was made in the 2003

- 2004 timeframe and resulted in large reductions in PM 2.5 , SO 2 , and NO X from these units.

Two other permitt ing actions affected the emissions of SO 2 and NO X from the Potomac River Power Station, a coal

- fired EGU located in Alexandria, Virginia. The first was a state operating permit issued on July 31, 2008 by the State Air Pollution Control Board to address modeled exceedances of the National Ambient Air Qua lity Standards and the Significant Ambient Air Concentrations. This permit limited the facility’s primary PM 2.5 emissions to 207 tpy, the SO 2 emissions to 3,813 tpy, and the NO X emissions to 3,700 tpy. On July 29, 2010, a second state operating permit was issued, further limiting the facility to 890 tons of NO X per ozone season (May 1 through September 30). This permit supported the emissions reductions associated with the Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area’s attainment plan, "Plan to Improve Air Quality in the Washington, DC

- MD

- VA Region." These permits were issued under Article 5 of 9VAC5 Chapter 80 (Permits for Stationary Sources), which was most recently approved into Virginia’s SIP on June 27, 2003 (63 FR 38191).

5.2.2.1.4 Future Point Source Emission Reduction Programs

Three federal regulations may reduce emissions of SO 2 even further than is already estimated by the 2017 and 2025 inventory shown in Table 5

- 2 for the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area. These rules we re not finalized at the time of the development of this maintenance plan and therefore were not considered in the 2017 and 2025 estimates included in this document. As these reg ulations are finalized, each should instigate significant further reductions, both within and outside the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area.

 Mercury and Air Toxics Rule: On February 16, 201 2 (77 FR 9304) , USEPA p ublished the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule to reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants from new and existing coal and oil

- fired EGUs. The rule establish es numerical emission limits for hydrogen chloride ( HCl ) as a surrogate for toxic acid gases or alternative standards for SO 2 . USEPA estimates that this rule would affect approximately 1,200 coal

- fired units nationwide and would reduce SO 2 emissions from power plants by 55 percent

. E xisting

sources are required to demonstrate compliance with the standards by 2015.

 Industrial/ Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Standard: USEPA issued a notice for the final ICI Boiler MACT rule on December 20, 2012 . US EPA estimates that implementation of the revised rulemaking will reduce emission s nationwide from major source boilers and process heaters by 16

, 593 tpy of PM 2.5 , 57 0,000 tpy of SO 2 , and 2

, 4 00 tpy of VOCs.

5.2.2.2 Nonroad Diesel Emission Reduction Program s

Under 40 CFR Part 89, USEPA adopted standards for emissions of NO X , hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide ( CO ) from several groups of nonroad engines, including industrial spark

ignition engines and recreational nonroad vehicles ( 67 FR 68242 ) . Industrial spark

- ignition engines power commercial and industrial applications and include forklifts, electric generators, airport baggage transport vehicles, and a variety of farm and construction applications. NonroadWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 16

recreational vehicles include sn owmobiles, off

- highway motorcycles, and all

- terrain vehicles. These rules were initially effective in 2004 and will be fully phased in by 2012.

The nonroad diesel rule set standards that reduce d emissions by more than 90 percent from nonroad diesel equipm ent and, beginning in 2007, the rule reduced fuel sulfur levels by 99 percent from previous levels. The reduction in fuel sulfur levels applied to most nonroad diesel fuel in 2010 and will apply to fuel used in locomotives and marine vessels in 2012 (69 F R 38958)

.
This program will continue to provide emission reductions of NO X as new equipment is purchased and older equipment is scrapped. Additionally, SO 2 emissions from the combustion of nonroad diesel fuel and locomotive and marine diesel fuel will continue to be reduced through 2012. 5

5.2.2.3 On

- Road Emission Reduction Programs

In the 2007 heavy

- duty highway rule, which is codified in 40 CFR Part 86, Subpart P, USEPA set a PM emission standard for new heavy

- duty engines of 0.01 grams per brake horsepower

- h our ( g/bhp

- hr ) . This standard t ook full effect for diesel engines in the 2007 model year. This rule include d standards for NO X and non

- methane hydrocarbons ( NMHC ) of 0.20 g/bhp

- hr and 0.14 g/bhp

- hr, respectively. These diesel engine NO X and NMHC standar ds w ere successfully phased in together between 2007 and 2010. The rule also required that s ulfur in diesel fuel be reduced to facilitate the use of modern pollution control technology on these trucks and buses. USEPA required a 97 percent reduction in t he sulfur content of highway diesel fuel

-- from levels of 500 parts per million ( ppm ) for low sulfur diesel to 15 ppm for ultra

- low sulfur diesel. The reductions in sulfur content engendered similar reductions in SO 2 emissions. These requirements were successfully implemented on the timeline in the regulation.

The Tier 1 federal motor vehicle emission standard s were published by USEPA on June 5, 1991 and were phased in beginning with the model year 1994 (40 CFR Part 86 subpart A)

. The benefits of this program are reflected in the 2002 base year inventory and the 2007 attainment year inventory. This federally implemented program affects light duty vehicles and light duty trucks. The regulations require more str ingent exhaust emission standards as well as a uniform level of evaporative emission controls.

The Tier 2 vehicle and gasoline sulfur program, as codified in Subpart H of 40 CFR Part 80, 40 CFR Part 85

, and 40 CFR Part 86

, became effective in the 2005 mo del year. This program for fleet averaging of on

- road vehicles is modeled after the California LEV II standards. The Tier 2 program allows manufacturers to produce vehicles with emissions ranging from relatively dirty to very clean, but the mix of vehicl es a manufacturer sells each year must have
average NO X emissions below a specified value

. Mobile emissions continue to benefit from this program as motorists replace older, more polluting vehicles with cleaner vehicles. 6

5 Details of Nonroad engine and fuel rules are available at

- http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/index.htm

6 Details of Onroad engine and fuel rules are available at

- http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/index.htmWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 17

In additional to the federal Ti er 2 program and the federal 2007 heavy duty highway rule, enhanced vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance (enhanced I/M) requirements have also been instituted by t he District of Columbia (64 FR 31498, 06/11/1999), the State of Maryland (64 FR 58340, 10/29/1999), and the Commonwealth of Virginia (64 FR 47670, 09/01/99)

. The requirements involve mandating regional vehicle emission I/M p rograms that are stricter than basic programs, as required under §§ 182 and 202 of the CAA

. Before 1994, basi c automobile emissions testing checked only tailpipe emissions while idl ing and sometimes at 2,500 rpm. Enhanced I/M procedures include the use of On Board Diagnostic (OBD) system evaluations, a wider range of vehicles tested, and may include a dynamomete r (treadmill) test that checks the car’s emissions under driving conditions. The OBD evaluations provide a more complete inspection, checking for excess evaporative emissions and other issues that might affect emissions from the vehicle.

5.2.2.4 Future Control S trategies

The Washington DC

- MD

- VA area commits to begin planning to identify appropriate strategies to help the area achieve and maintain compliance with a potential bump

- up of the region to a moderate classification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and with any future ozone NAAQS. This planning process will include, but is not limited to, the development of a preliminary 15% Rate of Progress Plan for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

The Washington DC

- MD

- VA area will work with jurisdictions and USEPA to demonstrate the fe asibility of (and get SIP credit for) achieving reductions across the entire region from market forces that will result in cleaner products being distributed across the entire region even when the regulations driving the cleaner products have only been ado pted in a part of the region.

The State of Maryland and the District of Columbia will work to pursue at least five new regulations to insure that, to the extent the transportation buffers are needed, there is no degradation of environmental protection in the State of Maryland and the District of Columbia portion of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS nonattainment area. These new measures will also begin the process of further reducing ozone and fine particle levels in the region to ensure that public health is protected. The State of Maryland and the District of Columbia agree with the scientific community who believe that more stringent ozone and fine particle standards are needed. The new regulatory programs include low sulfur home heating fuel, en hancements to current controls on consumer products and industrial adhesives, off

- road idling, and tougher requirements for smaller diesel generators. The commitments made by The State of Maryland and the District of Columbia will not be construed to infr inge upon any prerogative of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia will pursue measures that are necessary to attain and maintain current and future air quality standards as well as measures that may decrease the burden on regulated parties. For instance , Virginia is committed to pursue measures such as the on

- road emissions program, which will ensure that up to 30 percent of all eligible registered vehicles in the Northern Virginia area have the option of remotely passing required biennial vehicle emissi ons inspections by 2015. The increased level of on

- road monitoring could also result in the early identification and repair of high emitting vehicles s uch that this program will maintain environmental protections as well as reduce the time required for st ation

- based tests. Virginia is also committed toWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 18

supporting voluntary efforts to reduce energy consumption through energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. Organizations, such as the nonprofit Local Energy Alliance Program (LEAP), operate residen tial and commercial programs in Northern Virginia that seek to reduce energy use by at least 20 percent, thereby saving consumers ’ money, conserving resources, and decreasing air emissions.

6. Air Quality Monitoring Network

6.1 USEPA Requirements

Once an area has been redesignated, the state s must continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, to verify the area's attainment status. In cases wh ere measured mobile source parameters (for example, vehicle miles traveled) have changed over time, the state may also need to perform a saturation monitoring study to determine the need for and location of additional permanent monitors.

6.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

The District of Columbia, the State of M aryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia operate a monitoring network that is significantly more robust than required by federal regulation.

Figure 6

- 1 provides a map showing the locations of the various PM 2.5 monitoring sites in the current network.

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virgini a commit to operating and maintaining an air quality network for PM 2.5 monitoring that meets all federal requirements. Should measured mobile source parameters change significantly over time, the states comprising the Washington DC

- MD

- VA nonattainment area will perform a saturation monitoring study to determine the need for and location of PM 2.5 monitors.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 19 Figure 6

- 1 : Washington DC

- MD

- VA PM

2.5 Monitoring SitesWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 20

7. Verify Continued Attainment

7.1 USEPA Requirements

S tate s must ensure that they have the legal authority to implement and enforce all measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(2)(B) and (F ) of the CAA , and regulations promulgated in 40 CFR 51.110(k) suggest that one such measure is the acquisition of air quality and source emission data to demonstrate attainment and maintenance. The submittal must indicate how the state s will track the progress of the maintenance plan. This is necessary due to the fact that the emission projections made for the maintenance demonstration depend on assumptions of point, area, and mobile source growth.

One option for tracking the progress of the mainten ance demonstration would be for the

state s to periodically update the emissions inventory. In this case, the maintenance plan should specify the frequency of any planned inventory updates. Such an update could be based, in part, on the annual update of the US EPA Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) and could indicate new source growth and other changes from the attainment inventory (such as changes in vehicle miles traveled or in traffic patterns). As an alternative to a complete update of the inventory, state s may choose to do a comprehensive review of the f actors that were used in developing the attainment inventory to show no significant change. If this review does show a significant change, state s should then perform an update of the inventory.

7.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

The District of Columbia, the St ate of Maryland, and t he Commonwealth of Virginia ha ve the legal authority to implement and enforce specified measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Key regulatory elements that the respective state will keep in place to maintain attainment are as follows:

 Shutdown requirements, permitting requirements, and cap requirements, as described in Section 5.2.2.1

.

 I/M program requirements , as described in S ection 5.2.2.3

.
In addition to maintaining key elements of its regulatory program, each state will acquire ambient and source emis sion data to track attainment and maintenance. Each state will track the progress of the maintenance demonstration by periodically updating the emissions inventory. This tracking will consist of annual and periodic evaluations. The annual evaluation wi ll consist of checks on key emissi ons trend indicators such as the annual emissions update of stationary sources, the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) vehicle miles traveled data reported to the Federal Highway Administration, and other growth indicators. These indicators will be compared to the growth assumptions used in the plan to determine if the predicted versus the observed growth remains relatively constant. Each state will also develop and submit to US EPA comprehensive tracking inventories every three years or as requi red by federal regulation during the maintenance plan period

.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 21

8. C ontingency Measures

8.1 US EPA Requirements

The maintenance plan must include contingency measures, as necessary, to promptly

correct two future situations. The first situation is an inventory estimate that indicates the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area had actual emissions of either SO 2 , NO X , or PM 2.5 in any future year that were greater than that of the attainment year inventories listed in Table 4

- 1

. The second situation is any NAAQS violation that occurs after redesignation of an area. The plan should include meas ures to be adopted, a schedule and procedures for adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit for action. Specific triggers that would put the plan into motion must be identified. This plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the contingency measures are adopted exp editiously once they are triggered.

8.2 Washington DC

- MD

- VA Approach

The ability of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA nonattainment area to stay in compliance with the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS depends at least partially on the level of NO X , SO 2 , and primary PM 2.5 emissions in the region. Emissions are projected to stay well below the 2007 a ttainment year levels, through 2025. However, if emissions increase, the area may experience a PM 2.5 violation. To address this unlikely situation, the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia have developed a continge ncy plan. The situations described below would trigger the implementation of the contingency measures as described in Section 8.2.1 , Section 8.2.2 , or Section 8.2.3

.

 Annual actual emissions of SO 2 , NO X , or PM 2.5 exceeding the attainment year inventories in Table 4

- 1

.

 Any annual exceedance (annual average for one year at any federal reference method monitor in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA maintenance area) of 15.0 μg/m 3 or greater.

 Any violation (three year average of the annual average at any federal reference method monitor in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA maintenance area) of 15.0 μg/m 3 or greater.

8.2.1 Exceedance of the Attainment Year Emissions Inventory

Should any future year emissions inven tory data indicate that the Washington DC

- MD

VA area’s total emissions of SO 2 , NO X , or PM 2.5 exceeded the levels in Table 4

- 1 , the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia would first undertake an audit to determine whe ther inventory refinements were needed. This audit may include, but would not be limited to, a determination that appropriate models, control strategies, monitoring strategies, planning assumptions, industrial throughput, and production data were used in the attainment year and future year estimates. USEPA w ill be provided with the results of this audit. If this audit does not reconcile the originally estimated emissions exceedances, then the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia each commit to implementing one or more of the state

- defined programs listed in Table 8

- 1

, which applies toWashington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 22

their individual jurisdictions, so that future total e mission estimates for the Washington DC

- MD

VA area will not exceed those listed in Table 4

- 1

.

8.2.2 Near Term Contingency Measures for Air Q uality Exceedances

If an annual exceedance or violation of 15.0 μg/m 3 , as described in Section 8.2 , occurs prior to January 1, 2013, the Maryland He althy Air Act’s second phase will provide significant emissions reductions of precursors to PM 2.5 . This regulation, included in COMAR 26.11.27, requires additional SO 2 reductions beginning January 1, 2013, for applicable coal

- fired power plants in State o f Maryland. These applicable units include coal

- fired boilers located at the Morgantown Power Plant, the Dickerson Power Plant, and the Chalk Point Power Plant in the Washington DC

- MD

- VA nonattainment area. In 2013 the allowable tonnage cap for the units at these facilities will be reduced from 24,209 tpy of SO 2 to 18,541 tpy of SO 2 , a reduction of almost 24 percent . This regulation has the added benefit of already being codified; these reductions will take place in January of 2013 without further action by the State of Maryland.

8.2.3 Long Term Contingency Measures

If an annual exceedance of 15.0 μg/m 3 , as described in Section 8.2 , occurs after January 1, 2013, the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia each commit to implementing one of the state

- defined programs listed in Table 8

- 1

, which applies to their individual jurisdictions, to garner additional emission reductions for air quality improvement.

If an annual violation, as described in Section 8.2 , occurs after January 1, 2013, the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia each commit to implementing two or more of the state

- defined programs listed in Table 8

- 1

, which apply to their individual jurisdictions, to garner additional emission reductions for air quality improvement.

Table 8

- 1 : Contingency Control Measures

PM 2.5 Reasonable Available Control Measure (RACM) Determination *

SO 2 RACM Determination (DC & VA portions of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area) *

NO X RACM Determination *
Non Road Diesel Emission Reduction Strategies
Low Sulfur Home Heating Oil Requirements (DC & MD portions of the Washington DC

- MD

- VA area)

Alternative Fuel and Diesel Retrofit Programs for Fleet Vehicle Operations
Concrete Manufacturing

– Wet Suppression Upgrade Requirements
* If a RACM analysis determines that no controls are economically and technically feasible, then an alternate control measure from Table 8.1 will be implemented.Washington, DC

- MD

- VA PM 2.5 NAA Maintenance Plan, May 22, 2013 23

8.2.4 Contingency Measure Implementation Schedule

The District of Columbia, the State of Maryland, and the Commonwealth of Virginia commit to the implementation of any long term contingency measure on the following schedule:

 Sch edule onset: Three months after quality assured data determines that an exceedance or violation occurred within the previous year

, or three months after the conclusion of an audit that determines an emissions inventory exceedance of the levels noted in Ta ble 4

- 1 occurred.

 Applicable regulation or program to be adopted six months after this date.

 Applicable regulation to be implemented six months after adoption.

 Compliance with regulation, or full program implementation, to be achieved within 12 months of a doption.